KudoZ home » English » Art/Literary

sentence

English translation: Dostum overall and a comander of the Islamic Union locally lost the post. Mas'ud was the instigator.

Advertisement

Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
09:44 Jan 2, 2003
English to English translations [PRO]
Art/Literary
English term or phrase: sentence
In particular, the loss in November 1993 to Dostum of the Sher Khan Post on the Oxus at the instigation of Mas’ud by a commander of the Islamic Union became the last straw in the coalition between Dostum and Mas’ud.

My question is: who lost the post and who istigated who?
LM
Local time: 11:23
English translation:Dostum overall and a comander of the Islamic Union locally lost the post. Mas'ud was the instigator.
Explanation:
Further background that confirms that Mas’ud (transliterated differently below) instigated the attack as a direct assault on Dostum.

"... while Dostum had remained neutral up until then, Massoud decided, in early December, to attack the river port of Sher Khan Bandar (Kunduz province), which was defended by fighters from Jumbesh. Why this attack? Assem Akram, in his book History of the War in Afghanistan, offers several explanations. First, he mentions the rivalry between the two men, which had been exacerbated by their struggle for the control of the northern provinces. Dostum had managed to supplant Massoud in six provinces (Baghlan, Samangan, Jowzjan, Balkh, Sar-i Pul, and Faryab), which made it impossible for Massoud to join forces with Ismail Khan (who was fighting against Dostum for the control of Maymana then) in the west.

Besides, Dostum had got closer to President Rabbani, to such a point that the latter entrusted him with the presidential guard when he visited Saudi Arabia. Rabbani was probably trying to counterbalance Massoud’s military power by going closer to another military heavyweight. Ahmad Shah Massoud saw the danger and so decided to take the offensive in Sher Khan Bandar to oblige Rabbani to choose between him and Dostum. However, under the pressure of Rabbani, he gave the town, after having conquered it, to Jumbesh. From then on, according to Assem Akram, who lived these events from the inside, Massoud and Ismail Khan decided to expel Dostum from the north of the country ..."

source: site.voila.fr/pour_asm/englishbiographie.htm

Selected response from:

Peter Coles
Local time: 10:23
Grading comment
Thank you. Your answer is very helpful. The situation was further complicated by the fact, that Sayyaf (i.e. Islamic Union) had been the Mas'ud's ally at the time. So I assume that Dostum lost, Mas'ud was an instigator but it was a commander who won the post (for Mas'ud).The sentence is from the book by M.H.Kakar Afghanistan, the Soviet invasion...(http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/6413.html)Epilogue, note 107.
regards
LM
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer

Advertisement


Summary of answers provided
5 +5The commander of the Islamic Union lost it
Terry Thatcher Waltz, Ph.D.
5 +4...the loss.. of the Sher Khan post..by the commander of...etc. at the instigation (fault)of Masud..
Michael Deliso
5 +1Dostum overall and a comander of the Islamic Union locally lost the post. Mas'ud was the instigator.Peter Coles
5Dostum over Mas'ud in the final
William Clough
5 -1Dostum won the post....
Catherine Bolton


  

Answers


4 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5 peer agreement (net): +5
The commander of the Islamic Union lost it


Explanation:
and the person who caused the loss was Mas’ud.

Not the most clear way to say this, however!!

Terry Thatcher Waltz, Ph.D.
Local time: 05:23
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in pair: 11

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Peter Coles
10 mins

agree  Arthur Borges: YES! This nails it down in a nutshell, so to speak.
1 hr

agree  Noel Castelino: Yes, Mas'ud instigated the loss. Where is this sentence from, I wonder.
1 hr

agree  xxxKanta Rawat
2 hrs

agree  Refugio: You have got it
6 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

14 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5 peer agreement (net): +4
...the loss.. of the Sher Khan post..by the commander of...etc. at the instigation (fault)of Masud..


Explanation:
I think that the first thing to do is break down the whole paragraph. i.e. what it the loss? why or who caused the loss etc.. who benefited? then recombine the paraghraph again.
So.. The post (Sher Khan ) was lost to whom ? ( Dostum) by whom? (by a commander of the Islamic Union )instigated by whom? (instigation of Mas’ud ) etc,, etc,,,

Michael Deliso
Local time: 11:23
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish, Native in ItalianItalian
PRO pts in pair: 15

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Peter Coles: The original is horribly convoluted
2 mins

agree  Enza Longo
25 mins

agree  Anne Lee
39 mins

agree  Noel Castelino: It's not just the original that is convoluted. The situation is convoluted.
1 hr
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

15 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5 peer agreement (net): -1
Dostum won the post....


Explanation:
Dostum won the Sher Kahn post.
This form is common in English: For example, if you say that team XX lost the game to team YY, it means that team YY won and team XX lost.

The party instigated was Mas'ud. By whom? The commander of the Islamic Union.

You could reword the entire thing as: "The commander of the Islamic Union instigated Mas'ud and as a result, Dostum won the Sher Kahn post, which Mas'ud thus lost".

The sentence could certain have been written more clearly.

Catherine Bolton
Local time: 11:23
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in pair: 98

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
disagree  Peter Coles: Dostum actually lost the post, the original text should say "by Dostum" not "to Dostum", so not really your fault.
50 mins
  -> Well, all I can go on is the sentence given by the asker, and it does say "to Dostum".
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5 peer agreement (net): +1
Dostum overall and a comander of the Islamic Union locally lost the post. Mas'ud was the instigator.


Explanation:
Further background that confirms that Mas’ud (transliterated differently below) instigated the attack as a direct assault on Dostum.

"... while Dostum had remained neutral up until then, Massoud decided, in early December, to attack the river port of Sher Khan Bandar (Kunduz province), which was defended by fighters from Jumbesh. Why this attack? Assem Akram, in his book History of the War in Afghanistan, offers several explanations. First, he mentions the rivalry between the two men, which had been exacerbated by their struggle for the control of the northern provinces. Dostum had managed to supplant Massoud in six provinces (Baghlan, Samangan, Jowzjan, Balkh, Sar-i Pul, and Faryab), which made it impossible for Massoud to join forces with Ismail Khan (who was fighting against Dostum for the control of Maymana then) in the west.

Besides, Dostum had got closer to President Rabbani, to such a point that the latter entrusted him with the presidential guard when he visited Saudi Arabia. Rabbani was probably trying to counterbalance Massoud’s military power by going closer to another military heavyweight. Ahmad Shah Massoud saw the danger and so decided to take the offensive in Sher Khan Bandar to oblige Rabbani to choose between him and Dostum. However, under the pressure of Rabbani, he gave the town, after having conquered it, to Jumbesh. From then on, according to Assem Akram, who lived these events from the inside, Massoud and Ismail Khan decided to expel Dostum from the north of the country ..."

source: site.voila.fr/pour_asm/englishbiographie.htm



Peter Coles
Local time: 10:23
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in pair: 47
Grading comment
Thank you. Your answer is very helpful. The situation was further complicated by the fact, that Sayyaf (i.e. Islamic Union) had been the Mas'ud's ally at the time. So I assume that Dostum lost, Mas'ud was an instigator but it was a commander who won the post (for Mas'ud).The sentence is from the book by M.H.Kakar Afghanistan, the Soviet invasion...(http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/6413.html)Epilogue, note 107.
regards
LM

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Arthur Borges: The US seems in the thick of the Soviet learning curve out there. If all paths still lead to Rome, I suppose we'll have to reroute through Kabul and Mecca to get there from now on :-). PS The saying exists in Chinese too, except that,
10 mins
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5
Dostum over Mas'ud in the final


Explanation:
The reason this sentence is so horribly convoluted is that the loss itself is being used as the subject, and the participants are secondary information. In the end, Dostum beat Mas'ud because Mas'ud was instigated by an unnamed commander of the Islamic Union. This was what caused the tenuous alliance between Mas'ud and Dostum to finally break.

(This fits with what I have studied about the history of the Afghan warlords in that region.)

William Clough
United States
Local time: 05:23
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Arthur Borges: ...after Rome, it goes to Beijing.
4 mins

disagree  Peter Coles: Maybe Dostum over Mas'ud in the final, but Mas'ud over Dostum in this match, see additional context above.
12 mins
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Return to KudoZ list


KudoZ™ translation help
The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.



See also:



Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search